French Republican Mars Calendar

RobertDyck · 2014-01-24 14:49:39

Stories, stories. Yes, launching it where it's built is most efficient. However, Russia doesn't do that. They have the same problem as the US. They use big aircraft instead of barges to get stages to their launch site.

RobertDyck · 2014-01-24 15:05:23

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Is it really wise to have "Czar Vladimir Putin" as you space partner?

If you want the US to lead the way, then convince Congress to authorize it. I've been waiting for a mission to Mars since Apollo 11. NASA promised it would be launched in 1981, but instead we got the Space Shuttle. Blame Nixon, but US voters elected him. I consider a mission to Mars to be 33 years overdue. And Congress is not making any indications they will allow it in the foreseeable future. If they can't do it, someone else will. If you want the US to do it, then go talk to your Congressman.

If you elect Bob Zubrin as Prime Minister of Canada, then maybe.

How about Finance Minister Me? Seriously.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-01-24 16:43:44)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-24 18:56:03

Oh yes, your treasury secretary (Finance Minister) doesn't work for your chief executive, the Prime Mininster. Your legislative branch is your executive branch. So Parliament makes who's Finance minister a political decision. I don't think Zubrin would be happy as a Finance Minister, he's not a banker after all.

RobertDyck · 2014-01-24 21:05:02

I didn't say Zubrin, I said me.

I have been working to run as the local MP. I'm a computer programmer who has developed software for accounting systems, stock brokers, tax systems, government social services, and primary banking systems. My plan has had a set-back.

During the Canadian 2006 federal election, I proposed simply staying the course with spending, no cuts but no increases either. We had a surplus then. It would take 15 years to pay off the entire Canadian federal debt. Once gone, completely abolish federal personal income tax. Canada has Employment Insurance premiums and Canada Pension Plan premiums, two separate premiums that are the equivalent to Social Security. Those would have to stay, but no increase, no decrease, no change what so ever. Provincial income tax is under authority of provincial governments, so anyone who wants to change that would have to talk to their provincial politicians. But at least federal personal income tax would be gone. We would have had to freeze GST (federal sales tax) and corporate income tax at the level there were at that time. We have a GST credit that is paid back to moderate and low income earners; that would have to be abolished when federal personal income tax is abolished. Tax on corporate dividends would have to be shifted from personal to corporate income tax, so that dividends stay taxed. And when we do abolish that tax, the personal income tax division of the Canada Revenue Agency would have to be laid off. Permanently laid off, not returning. They couldn't be re-assigned elsewhere in the federal civil service, because if we're to realise the saving, that means their salaries. If provincial governments want to retain provincial personal income tax, they would have to pay for collecting it. The CRA would still exist, they also collect GST and corporate taxes, just a lot smaller.

I was webmaster, volunteer coordinator, brochure writer, and all around worker bee for the local candidate during the 2006 election. She asked me to put a blog on her website, but didn't say what goes in it. So I took the opportunity to post my ideas, and put my own name on the blog. I posted this tax proposal. So this was the official campaign website for the local candidate of one of Canada's two major political parties. The leader of the opposing political party went on national TV to argue against this idea. I was the only one in the party talking about it. I wasn't the candidate at that time, wasn't the campaign manager or electoral district association president, and this was a riding where our candidate has come third since 1979. I was nobody in the middle of nowhere, but the leader of the other federal party felt it necessary to go on national TV to campaign against me. That individual is now Prime Minister of Canada. That says how much attention I got. Many in my own party have not accepted this, it's too radical. But voters love it.

My tax plan has a further setback. That other party has cut GST and corporate income tax, while freezing personal income tax. I would have to undo that.

A year later, 2007, I became president of the riding (electoral district) association and candidate. But it wasn't long before problems started. The CRA garnisheed my wages, and as a result I lost my job. Have been struggling with a tiny home business ever since. That got resolved: turned out they counted all my income for the previous year twice, claiming I earned twice the income. They had already provided a formal written assessment confirming how much they owe me, but didn't pay. They've since removed the garnishee and paid me, but that took years to resolve. And in 2008 the bank shut down all my accounts, called all my loans. They tried to cease my house, despite the fact I don't have a mortgage. Paid off the mortgage in year 2000, but they tried anyway. The bank branch manager was on my side, but someone powerful was out to get me. Their excuse was to claim my January 2008 credit card payment didn't count, despite the fact I have documentation it was paid in full and 6 days before the due date. That also got resolved, but my credit is destroyed. The party disallowed my nomination for the 2008 election. They replaced me, a week and a half into the election campaign. But two days after the public announcement of his nomination, the same bank pulled the same stunt. He was forced to sell controlling interest in his business. All this means I got serious attention from someone.

By the way, I was not only president of the local riding (electoral district) association, and candidate until the party replaced me, I was also a member of the executive for the provincial chunk of the federal party.

Someone else ran as the local candidate for the 2011 federal election. She's as beautiful as a super model, always dresses as if she just came off the cover of a fashion magazine, make up and hair look professionally done, and great public speaker. But policy? She hasn't got a clue. Voters noticed. She got the worst results of any candidate for our party in this area ever. I checked election results all the way back to Confederation. When I talk to voters they don't remember her name. When I describe her this way, their response is "Oh, that one!" Voters are not stupid. My argument to let me run in the next election. I still have strong supporters in the riding association executive. And they're surprised to learn the other candidate doesn't even live in our riding.

I am serious. When I talked to Dr. Zubrin about the idea of a Canadian led international mission, he also argued that the American system of government is better. He is staunchly American. However, my argument is if you want America to rule Mars, then tell Congress to get off its ass and get the job done. If they don't, I will.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-24 21:52:04

You know Robert, from what you described, you sound like a Tea Party guy, You want to cut taxes. Economics works the same regardless of the political system. I think its time we expanded the Tea Party movement into Canada. Cutting taxes makes the economy grow faster, and lets face it, the United States and Canada share the same economy. What I would want to do is have a Customs Union between our two countries, that is we don't regulate who or what crosses our mutual border. Canadian citizens would have automatic residency in the United States should they wish it and the same would apply to United States citizens in Canada. There would be no border agents guarding the US/Canada border, just a sign that says "welcome to Canada" or welcome to the United States. There still would be two national governments of course and the jurisdiction of each government would stop at that border, but a US citizen or a Canadian citizen could just drive across that border without even slowing down, and our border agents can be redeployed where they would be more useful, such as at the border with Mexico. I believe the EU has a system like this. Also no tariffs on goods crossing that border. If someone wants to build a house that straddles the US Canadian border and have half his house in the US and the other half in Canada, we should let him. As for NASA, why not make it into a continental space Agency We could call it the "North American Space Agency" NASA, it would have the same initials? Have the US Congress fund part of it and the Canadian Parliament fund the other part. I don't see why the US Congress can't meet with the members of the Canadian Parliament and hash out a common space program, and then have both legislators vote on funding for a single bill.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-01-24 21:55:30)

RobertDyck · 2014-01-24 23:12:25

The bi-national free trade agreement of the 1980s was supposed to do all that. But US Congress reneged. Then NAFTA was supposed to do all that. Bill Clinton wanted to include Mexico so our free trade area would have a greater population than the EU. His intention was NAFTA would compete against the EU. We didn't want to include Mexico because it has a third world economy, but we had some disputes that had to be resolved. When negotiating you give something to get something. But the purpose of NAFTA did not stand. Then George W. Bush got elected and chose to treat the Canadian border as the Mexican border. We used to have the longest undefended border in the world. After George W.: undefended no more. Why would we believe it would work any differently this time?

Common space agency? Canada's astronauts where housed in Houston and integrated with NASA until the end of the Shuttle. Chris Hadfield was a US air force test pilot before becoming a Canadian astronaut. He was one of the astronauts assigned to the Shuttle program. But since cancellation of Shuttle, he was housed in Star City, Russia, learning how to run a Soyuz, and learning the Russian language. He was commander of ISS, and did so well he has become extremely popular in Canada.

Prior to 9/11, I did just drive across the border, tell US custom guards who I was, and continue to drive. However, shortly after 9/11, Canadians require a passport. Now Americans require a passport to get back into the US from Canada, creating a major barrier for various conventions.

The Winnipeg chapter has bid to host a Mars Society convention, and we do run a Science Fiction convention of equal size every year. In fact it's growing: more attendees in the last few years. But since the passport restriction after 9/11, Americans don't want to come here. The last few years we have also had a Comic Con, with more than 4 times as many attendees, and big name actors like Willian Shatner, Patrick Stewart, Avery Brooks, David Prowse, Bruce Boxleitner, Ron Perlman, Laura Vandervoort, Zoie Palmer, and others. By the way, to any actors who attend: don't expect Winnipeggers to line up. Your table won't be empty, but don't expect a line. Winnipeggers will mull about until the person currently talking to you is gone, then they'll approach. You'll be busy, but no line. It's a Winnipeg thing.

So you want me to join the Tea Party. Well, the Tea Party has a lot of good things going for it. Unfortunately it has a lot of bad things mixed in as well. I can out do any Tea Party member about tax or libertarian issues, but on social issues I sound rather liberal. That's the Liberal Party of Canada; at least that's what I thought under leader Paul Martin. I'm conerned about the direction it's heading.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-01-24 23:17:33)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-25 08:36:20

RobertDyck wrote:

The bi-national free trade agreement of the 1980s was supposed to do all that. But US Congress reneged. Then NAFTA was supposed to do all that. Bill Clinton wanted to include Mexico so our free trade area would have a greater population than the EU. His intention was NAFTA would compete against the EU. We didn't want to include Mexico because it has a third world economy, but we had some disputes that had to be resolved. When negotiating you give something to get something. But the purpose of NAFTA did not stand. Then George W. Bush got elected and chose to treat the Canadian border as the Mexican border. We used to have the longest undefended border in the world. After George W.: undefended no more. Why would we believe it would work any differently this time?
Common space agency? Canada's astronauts where housed in Houston and integrated with NASA until the end of the Shuttle. Chris Hadfield was a US air force test pilot before becoming a Canadian astronaut. He was one of the astronauts assigned to the Shuttle program. But since cancellation of Shuttle, he was housed in Star City, Russia, learning how to run a Soyuz, and learning the Russian language. He was commander of ISS, and did so well he has become extremely popular in Canada.
Prior to 9/11, I did just drive across the border, tell US custom guards who I was, and continue to drive. However, shortly after 9/11, Canadians require a passport. Now Americans require a passport to get back into the US from Canada, creating a major barrier for various conventions.
The Winnipeg chapter has bid to host a Mars Society convention, and we do run a Science Fiction convention of equal size every year. In fact it's growing: more attendees in the last few years. But since the passport restriction after 9/11, Americans don't want to come here. The last few years we have also had a Comic Con, with more than 4 times as many attendees, and big name actors like Willian Shatner, Patrick Stewart, Avery Brooks, David Prowse, Bruce Boxleitner, Ron Perlman, Laura Vandervoort, Zoie Palmer, and others. By the way, to any actors who attend: don't expect Winnipeggers to line up. Your table won't be empty, but don't expect a line. Winnipeggers will mull about until the person currently talking to you is gone, then they'll approach. You'll be busy, but no line. It's a Winnipeg thing.
So you want me to join the Tea Party. Well, the Tea Party has a lot of good things going for it. Unfortunately it has a lot of bad things mixed in as well. I can out do any Tea Party member about tax or libertarian issues, but on social issues I sound rather liberal. That's the Liberal Party of Canada; at least that's what I thought under leader Paul Martin. I'm conerned about the direction it's heading.

You ever hear about a fellow named Ron Paul? He's liberal on the Social issues as well. as for dealing with social issues, that is why we have a Federal Republic, one of the platforms of the Tea Party is States Rights, that means the Federal Government doesn't decide everything. I think including Mexico in NAFTA was a mistake, a portion of the Republican party just wants cheap labor, that's the portion with the money, they part that makes campaign donations. Its a political fiction to treat Canada and Mexico as if they were the same, but they aren't.

The United States and Canada are both Democracies, Russia is not. A partnership with Russia is like having a partnership with Napoleon. I'd rather not have dictatoral human rights violators as coalition partners. Also another truism is that empires make lousy neighbors, and you know of course that Russia is trying to claim the North Pole. I think Canada comes closer to the North Pole than does Russia, I would think Canada would have something to say about that.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-01-25 08:38:44)

RobertDyck · 2014-01-25 11:28:58

I thought Ron Paul was the only candidate during the last US presidential election who could be called sane. A lot of Democrats had a lot of hopes for Obama. A lot of members of the Liberal Party in Canada had hopes for Obama. But I actually watched the New Hampshire primary debate, the first Democrat debate prior to the 2008 presidential election. I watched it on the website for CNN. Not many Canadians are sufficient political junkies to watch an entire American primary debate, but I did. Obama was the most hawkish of the Democrat candidates, so I wasn't surprised when he didn't fulfill all the expectations of Democrat voters. He never said he would do many of those things. But Obama hasn't even done many of the things he has said he would do. He's a big disappointment. Ron Paul is a Republican, it's surprising to hear a Republican talk with sanity. I know, my political bias is showing. But it would have been much better if Ron Paul was president. Oh, well.

You want to recognise Canada is not Mexico? Ok. Tell that to US Customs. And the Montana militia.

As for Russia, they're our neighbour. Canada is good at making nice with other countries. It doesn't matter if they have a different political system, we can still be friends. Since 1927 Canada's borders in the arctic have been a wedge to the point of the north pole. Our borders do not conflict with official Russian claims. One member of the Russian Duma (their parliament) wants to claim the entire arctic ocean, but that isn't their official claim. Then claim a wedge to the point of the north pole. So our claim doesn't conflict with theirs, it means we have a common border at the point of the north pole. But one member of the Canadian parliament, Peter MacKay, claimed the entire arctic ocean as well. So we have one idiot as well. I would like to send both that member of the Russian Duma and Peter MacKay to the arctic, without a parka. Let them fight it out, and freeze to death in arctic cold. There was a UN motion to set new rules about borders, and Canada was working with them rather than fighting. We sent science vessels to claim territory we already own. Russian used an undersea ridge to backup their claims, so Canadian scientists used an undersea ridge to justify territory we already own. That ridge extends into international waters, so justifies expanding our claim a bit. But not so much that it would conflict with Russia. But Peter MacKay is a major player in the political party that currently has a majority in the Canadian parliament. They decided to register a claim that goes farther, conflicts with Russia. I don't believe Russia will go along with that; this creates an unnecessary conflict.

Working with our neighbour on a space project is a good thing. Good fences make good neighbours. Besides, their Energia rocket cost $60 to $100 million to restore infrastructure plus $120 million per launch in 1994, including the Energia Upper Stage. There would be inflation today, and the roof of the vehicle assembly building collapsed in 2002, but that's still a lot cheaper than SLS.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2014-01-25 11:51:06)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-25 13:21:12

I always assumed that the Arctic Ocean, like the other three oceans were considered international waters. What if for instance the US were to claim a large swath of the Pacific Ocean from the Hawaiian Islands to the California coast? Just saying. I think you'd have to admit that Russia is a different sort of neighbor than is the USA. one thing Putin has in mind is remaking the Russian Empire, and a part of that is retaking all those lands that Boris Yeltsin gave away, this doesn't make Russia the best of neighbors to states like Ukraine and Georgia for instance. If there is a modern equivalent to the late Roman Empire, Russia would be it, Putin is the "First Citizen of Russia" much as Augustus Caesar was, like Caesar, Putin has the Duma and Augustus had the Roman Senate. The Roman Senate during Augustus' rein was a fig leaf to Republican Rule, just like the current Russian Duma is today. If ever we major colonization of the Solar System, if Russia is still around, I'm afraid the Russians will fill the role of the fictional Romulans in the Star Trek Universe, they'll have an aggressive space fleet causing all sorts of trouble, making claims on various resources at the expense of other space powers. I'm just saying, right now were at the early exploration phase of the Solar System, if space travel becomes cheaper, expect a more aggressive Russian presence. Also watch out for the Chinese, they're another aggressive empire! Notice that the Chinese still support North Korea, despite their frequent human rights violations and oppression of their own people, even to the point of returning escaped North Korean citizens to their own country to face punishment, that alone gives us plenty of reason to distrust the Chinese. The Japanese have been better behaved since World War II, they would make a good coalition partner, as would Europe, and Israel, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea. I would tend to shy away from blatantly Third World countries with unstable governments, I'd put China in that group as well, China earns its bread through the exploitation of its own people as a source of cheap labor, seems to me that sooner or later, there is going to be another revolution in China, it may be a good thing, but as with France, we have to be careful! Often times when a huge underclass forms the backbone of a revolution, that revolution might only be a transition from one sort of tyranny to another, as was the case in Russia twice so far. My advice is don't get too cozy with Putin, the Russians might not like you for it later.

Terraformer · 2014-01-26 04:13:06

But why would Britain want to work with America, given the latters flagrant abuse of human rights and disregard of the rule of law? Sure, I'd rather live in America than Russia, but I'd rather live in Russia than China, and China rather than North Korea. I've still got Canada on a list of potential countries to live in (also on this list are New Zealand, Iceland, and America (Alaska)); it has a higher rating for economic freedom, and if I'm rich enough to bankroll a spaceplane, I'd rather not do it in the US thanks to their export controls, but Canada is close enough for easy access to the US.

But sufficiently cheap access to space will nullify the state anyway. If the price of emigrating to the colonies is within the range of most people in developed countries, then I think a lot of people - mainly those who generate wealth - will choose to leave, leaving behind a system that has plenty of outputs but very few inputs. Now, I'm not saying that Terra will experience a massive brain drain, except that it will. How does your company continue when the majority of your employees have decided they have a better life awaiting them in a Martian homestead? What do you do when all the local businesses in a town decide they'd be better off serving people on Luna? It's not hard to see a world where the people left are either on welfare or working for the government. Well, plus a few hardy souls who are working in the black market.

Void · 2014-01-26 23:05:32

Because America won't persist in this pattern . according to the book the fourth turning.
American should enter a new era of confidence around 2025 .supposedly this will involve a greater economic equality and some and some modern equivalent of labor union activity . The era of vertical stratification will be over. We have resources along with Canada resources . We have two Rovers on Mars . it's frustrating to see the lack of progress but a lot is being done . America is not a sluch when it comes to space activities . I'm extremely happy to see the Europeans being involved too . and many others . there is likely to be a trade organization between Europe and North America and the Pacific trade organizations as well. The British would be well-positioned to participate to their own benefit. Economic activities would also include space activities I'm sure .

Last edited by Void (2014-01-27 06:31:48)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-27 05:41:23

I notice Terraformer would rather talk about nations than leaders. I said don't trust Putin specifically, I didn't say don't trust all Russians. Russians don't get a say in how their country is run so long as its under the dictatorship of Putin. In the same time that Putin was leader of Russia, we've had two Presidents, and I'll bet that on January 20, 2017 when Obama is no longer President of the United States, Putin will still be leader of Russia, unless the Russians overthrow him by Revolution. What I am saying is there are two classes of country, those that are democracies and those that are not, Russia is of the later type, it is basically the same country as it was under the Tsars. What Russia does as a country has more to do with what its leader wants rather than what its people want. So a partnership with Russia specifically means a partnership with the man Vladimir Putin.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-27 05:56:02

Void wrote:

because America won't persist in this pattern . according to the boo.k the fourth turning
American should enter a new era of confidence around 2025 .supposedly this will involve a greater economic equality and some and some modern equivalent of labor union activity . the era of vertical stratification will be over . we have resources along with Canada resources . we have two Rovers on Mars . it's frustrating to see the lack of progress but a lot is being done . America is not a sluch when it comes to space activities . I'm extremely happy to see the Europeans being involved too . and many others . there is likely to be a trade organization between Europe and North America and the Pacific trade organizations as well . the British would be well-positioned to participate to their own benefit . economic activities would also include space activities I'm sure .

2025 is 11 years from now. There was talk recently of the Army replacing its soldiers with robots. Now the question arises of what happens when robots replace humans in a lot of other fields of economic activity? I think in that case the Earned income tax credit becomes a lot more important, which is a kind of negative income tax in the United States. It should then be possible to support oneself on the Earned income tax credit alone, since the robotization of the economy will make everything cheaper. So you may be right about us all being more equal, if none of us can get a job as robots are doing all the work, then it doesn't matter how talented one human is compared to another, as we're all equally unemployed. In this era it should also be possible to construct floating cities in the skies of Venus, since it will all be paid for by the Earned Income tax credit by those humans that want to live there and all the work will be done by robots.

Void · 2014-01-27 06:52:31

Tom Kalbfus said:

Now the question arises of what happens when robots replace humans in a lot of other fields of economic activity? I think in that case the Earned income tax credit becomes a lot more important, which is a kind of negative income tax in the United States.

Well, then people with skills to do what the robots do not do will gain in importance. There have been several things dragging the American economy down. One, is that the post WWII benefit ran out. Others became more competitive again, and others developed a use to compete for resources again. Turning away from automated manufacturing was a mistake as well, but it could not be avoided apparently because the low wage work force that became availible around the world was too much of a trend to fight against.

If robots are actually productive, then naturally there will be more wealth to spend. You can't eat a loaf of bread unless someone makes one. If the robots make lots of bread, then everyone has better chances of getting some.

But by 2025 +/- ??? we should be done with our culture wars, and a very materialistic and not so spiritual culture. If you can make a case for wealth and money from space, they will come.

It is not the baby boomers who will have such an attitude, but the three following generations who had to put up with growing up in the crisis who will have such attitudes. They will want a better material life, and no words will change their attitude about it.

My own take is that economics is like a very simple electrical power formula. P=I*E

But "E" is equivalant to economic stratification. This shows people that if you are successful (And sometimes luck is a factor in that) you must try to do what it takes, or you will be poor.

But "I" represents opportunity. A stratified society suffers from a lack of chances for those with potential. If they cannot afford training in terms of money or time, then they don't get trained and all the previous energy that society (Parents) invested in them goes to waste.

I am not a socialist at all. Nor do I like pseudo plantation type cultures. It is by finding a hybrid of the two, that the greatest economic power is realized.

It is like the family. We do not take babies and throw them out into the January snow, and say "We can create a super race. The ones that survive will be strong, it will be a race of supermen".

No, if any children did survive that the would breed a race of sharks. Small minded, very good at what they do, and instinctive, not suitable for an advanced society, it's creation or maintenance.

As for the de-stratification tool? I don't know, I have read that it will happen. I am not going to be a part of that. I am a baby boomer. Spiritual, creative. Have enough to get by in material things. Moving to the end of my life, just an observer for the most part.

Last edited by Void (2014-01-27 06:54:28)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-27 08:29:08

Void wrote:

Tom Kalbfus said:
Now the question arises of what happens when robots replace humans in a lot of other fields of economic activity? I think in that case the Earned income tax credit becomes a lot more important, which is a kind of negative income tax in the United States.
Well, then people with skills to do what the robots do not do will gain in importance.

Assuming there will be such people. I think when computers equal the ability of the humans will the lowest intelligence, it will not be long from then before computers exceed the smartest of humans. Most people do work that is below their mental capacities, I certainly do. Computers advance fairly fast, and when you have one computer which can do a certain job, you can have as many as you need as software can be copied unlike the contents of someone's mind.

Void wrote:

There have been several things dragging the American economy down. One, is that the post WWII benefit ran out. Others became more competitive again, and others developed a use to compete for resources again. Turning away from automated manufacturing was a mistake as well, but it could not be avoided apparently because the low wage work force that became available around the world was too much of a trend to fight against.

Computers simply aren't advanced enough right now to be competitive with low wage labor, that does not mean this will always be the case. One case in point is human coal miners. Why do you suppose we keep sending human coal miners underground to dig for coal when we have robots crawling around on the surface of Mars for over a decade now? Don't you think we could also send robots underground to dig for coal, and if an accident happens, then we would only lose equipment and not human lives? I think that advance awaits further advancements in robotics, and I believe those advancements will be coming soon, and then we'll have a lot of unemployed coal miners on our hands.

Void wrote:

If robots are actually productive, then naturally there will be more wealth to spend. You can't eat a loaf of bread unless someone makes one. If the robots make lots of bread, then everyone has better chances of getting some.

Yep, I agree, and we already have a mechanism in place to pay people who are not working, and that's called the Earned Income Tax Credit, if you have a low enough income, the Federal government pays you money, with automation that government will still tax corporations that replace most of their employees with robots, and those companies will sell to people getting the Earned Income Tax credit. Automation will bring costs down a lot, there will be a lot of deflation, so $7,000 a year may be enough to support a family of four, unlike it is today in the United States. if one goes to McDonalds to buy a hamburger in 2025, it would be like going to a vending machine more or less. Most McDonald's have it arranged that you get your meal within a few minutes of you paying for it, what robotisization would do is replace all those cooks and sandwich makers in the back with robots making sandwiches and getting fries., probably they guy in front taking your money will be a robot as well, and a robot will patrol the eating area sweeping the floor, wiping tables, picking up litter and cleaning the restrooms.

Void wrote:

But by 2025 +/- ??? we should be done with our culture wars, and a very materialistic and not so spiritual culture. If you can make a case for wealth and money from space, they will come.
It is not the baby boomers who will have such an attitude, but the three following generations who had to put up with growing up in the crisis who will have such attitudes. They will want a better material life, and no words will change their attitude about it.
My own take is that economics is like a very simple electrical power formula. P=I*E
But "E" is equivalant to economic stratification. This shows people that if you are successful (And sometimes luck is a factor in that) you must try to do what it takes, or you will be poor.

But "I" represents opportunity. A stratified society suffers from a lack of chances for those with potential. If they cannot afford training in terms of money or time, then they don't get trained and all the previous energy that society (Parents) invested in them goes to waste.
I am not a socialist at all. Nor do I like pseudo plantation type cultures. It is by finding a hybrid of the two, that the greatest economic power is realized.
It is like the family. We do not take babies and throw them out into the January snow, and say "We can create a super race. The ones that survive will be strong, it will be a race of supermen".
No, if any children did survive that the would breed a race of sharks. Small minded, very good at what they do, and instinctive, not suitable for an advanced society, it's creation or maintenance.
As for the de-stratification tool? I don't know, I have read that it will happen. I am not going to be a part of that. I am a baby boomer. Spiritual, creative. Have enough to get by in material things. Moving to the end of my life, just an observer for the most part.

If you have any sort of underclass, then you produce opportunities for demigogs to gain power by misleading them, that is why I'm not for the creation or importation (read illegal aliens) of any sort of human underclass, that might someday rise up and undertake a revolution which historically has been so easily misled and which ends up with less freedom for everybody. That was the selfish reason to be against slavery in the 19th century by the way, the unselfish reason was simply that it was wrong and unchristian, but the selfish reason why many were abolitionists was because they feared a slave uprising, as had occurred in Haiti in the early 19th century. The main fear to put is simply was their plantation owner neighbors would by some slaves and as his plantation grew, he would have more and more slaves to do his work and then someday there would be a slave uprising on the plantation the slaves would kill their masters, and then they would kill people that looked like their masters, that would be the white neighbors who didn't own slaves.

We must be careful about what sort of robots we create, as we don't want a similar robot uprising, we don't want robots with free will trying to take over society, that would defeat the purpose of creating them, so we better be careful about not making them too much like us.

Void · 2014-01-27 09:06:56

Cyborg society I guess. If robots get smarter Cyborg/People do as well. How does that end??? Not really this old mans problem.

Some things are way above my pay grade.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-27 09:55:08

I see three possibilities:
You have "Cylons"
You have "robots are us" (We upload our minds to them)
or we have "I Robot" as in the Asimov novels

Which one of these do you think its going to be, or can you think of another outcome?

Void · 2014-01-27 11:21:30

I think agumented humans. And their associated smart appliances.

Cancer is a deviation from a body plan.

I believe that any machine culture would rapidly decay into a cancer which will consume it's host, and in a fit of insanity go extinct.

I have plenty of personal reasons to believe that there is a higher order beyond ours.

Motivation is really just passing time, waiting for the next phone call from reality. Taking the call, responding, experiencing.

I don't see robots being able handle irrational reality, without self destructive behaviors.

Our emotions about playing a game where we either handle a situation or don't. The emotion is the basis of existance.

Last edited by Void (2014-01-27 12:45:58)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-27 12:09:50

There maybe a higher power. Even if one is not religious, a higher power could easily evolve if there is life in the Universe, and that higher power might choose not to make itself so obvious, it doesn't necessarily have to conform itself to any of our religions either. What its purposes are I can't say, but we can eliminate some by deductive reasoning. If a higher power exists, its purpose is not to destroy humanity, because if it was it would have done so already.

Void · 2014-01-27 12:49:29

We most likely could not understand their level of morality. Perhaps they are slightly interested, and care a little bit about us. But revealing themselves would take away our story, leave us with a loss of some kind.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-27 13:45:11

There is a limit to what we can deduce with no information, which is basically what the higher power is giving us, if there is any. One interesting coincidence is that the Moon appears to be the same size as the Sun in our sky. Another coincidence is that Mars has nearly the same day length as the Earth, what is the chance of that? Maybe we were meant to go there. The higher power didn't want to make it obvious by making Mars habitable. Perhaps there are some monuments or artifacts on Mars if we look hard enough. Mars has the same land area as the Earth, finding something of artificial origin on Mars is not going to be easy.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-01-27 13:46:55)

louis · 2014-01-27 18:30:38

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

There is a limit to what we can deduce with no information, which is basically what the higher power is giving us, if there is any. One interesting coincidence is that the Moon appears to be the same size as the Sun in our sky. Another coincidence is that Mars has nearly the same day length as the Earth, what is the chance of that? Maybe we were meant to go there. The higher power didn't want to make it obvious by making Mars habitable. Perhaps there are some monuments or artifacts on Mars if we look hard enough. Mars has the same land area as the Earth, finding something of artificial origin on Mars is not going to be easy.

Isn't that thing about the size of the moon in the sky fairly "recent".

I think I read that originally the Moon was ten times closer to the Earth. Can you imagine that - the Moon appearing ten times bigger?!

And of course the intertidal zones (so important in terms of evolution) would have been much larger.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-28 11:58:28

Everything in the Cosmos is moving, so either its a coincidence, it was deliberate or the formation of modern humans depended on the Moon appearing the same size as the Sun in Earth's sky. Which one are you willing to go with?

RobertDyck · 2014-01-30 13:08:27

It happened again. I talked seriously about using Russia's big rocket for a mission to Mars, then someone in Russia proposed reviving that same rocket. Someone is reading this forum.

Russian Space Agency Plans World’s Biggest Rocket
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140128/186987 … ocket.html

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-01-31 09:37:56

Then Russia can claim Mars just the way they claimed the Arctic Ocean. It is interesting that the Russians have had better luck with Venus than with Mars I don't know why that is. If you want Mars to be an Empire, then letting Russia take it over would be the way to do it. Russia has never been a Democracy, its entire history has been one of Empire, they had a trial with Democracy under Boris Yeltsin and they failed. Russia was born as the Duchy of Muscovy expanded to become the Empire of Russia and so has been ever since.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2014-01-24 14:49:39

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#27 2014-01-24 15:05:23

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#28 2014-01-24 18:56:03

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#29 2014-01-24 21:05:02

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#30 2014-01-24 21:52:04

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#31 2014-01-24 23:12:25

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#32 2014-01-25 08:36:20

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#33 2014-01-25 11:28:58

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#34 2014-01-25 13:21:12

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#35 2014-01-26 04:13:06

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#36 2014-01-26 23:05:32

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#37 2014-01-27 05:41:23

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#38 2014-01-27 05:56:02

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#39 2014-01-27 06:52:31

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#40 2014-01-27 08:29:08

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#41 2014-01-27 09:06:56

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#42 2014-01-27 09:55:08

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#43 2014-01-27 11:21:30

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#44 2014-01-27 12:09:50

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#45 2014-01-27 12:49:29

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#46 2014-01-27 13:45:11

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#47 2014-01-27 18:30:38

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#48 2014-01-28 11:58:28

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#49 2014-01-30 13:08:27

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

#50 2014-01-31 09:37:56

Re: French Republican Mars Calendar

Board footer